Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="spb_stan" data-source="post: 624902" data-attributes="member: 43545">When the D7000 came out, as moderator of a forum specific for D7xxx series cameras, there was a flood of complaints about not quite sharp focus by photographers who had experience with prior models that at the time topped out at 12mpx.  The result was a combination of minor problems, one being the expectation of 100% being a reasonable magnafication for pixel peeping to check sharpness. That was an error in thinking, 100% on the nearer cameras was much more blown up than 12mpx. The same happened again with the D800 with  36mpx came out, but the D7100 has a lot more pixel density than a D800, so 100% view is zooming into a very small cross section of the sensor. The second problem was seeing vibration radius being so much finer, the same techniques that  were fine on film and on 12mpx cameras just was not quite good enough. Tripods needed to be sturdier, shutter speeds needed to be a bit higher, and any lenses that were off in either adjustment or optical quality really showed. The old uncoated lenses often showed their weaknesses. There was also talk of mirror slap but the D7x00 had a pretty non-violent action and in fact my D7000 has about 1/2 the acoustic shutter noise than my D800. Gradually the complaints dropped off and no changes were made in the cameras, and after a number of months the consensus was that the D7x00 series was the best non-pro camera around. The first  thing to do is try to isolate the defect in the images because assigning attribution to a cause. As suggested, look at your images, how do you see it, when pixel peeping or when view full image on a screen?  Do JPGs look better or worse than RAW renderings, Is anything in the frame in sharp focus?You mention you notice it more on distance subjects. How are you seeing the distant subjects, by zooming in the monitor, or when seeing subjects which were zoomed optically and  fill the monitor?If you are zooming in with the monitor, and the subjects fill less than 1/3 of the frame, there is a good possibility you are just  seeing too few pixels defining the subject. How many pixels span the face for example if the subject is a person?  You can zoom in further with higher res sensor but higher res does not make the lens, tripod or camera shake any better so it looks worse when pixel peeping.  Do you see the lack of sharpness when viewing the whole image, not zoomed in, from a normal viewing distance?  One word of advice, the habit of pixel peeping causes much more harm than good and causes frustration needlessly, it has no positive. and delays development as a photographer, a habit learned by beginners before they understand what they are looking at and why is has no bearing on whether it is a good image or not..  If it looks good at normal viewing distance when seeing the entire frame, your job is done. It IS good if it tells a story well and looks good at normal distances. The same with any art viewed at the intended viewing distance. Please post some images that frustrate you, without any post processing and with data intact.</blockquote>

Verification